Dear Ones,

     I have been appalled at the amount of people running around, spouting the idea that Osama bin Laden and the Taliban should be shown compassion and love; and that, perhaps, this would change their views of America.

     I am not one to endorse violence, but I'm sorry.  That is just ridiculous.  You want to hold hands with bin Laden, sing songs around the campfire, and give him a daisy?  As Christians, yes, we should be loving and forgiving.  But it is not the government's job to do so.

     On September 11, 2001, thousands of innocent lives were murdered in the United States in an act of terrorism.  To be sure, it was an act of pure evil.  Most of us have gone from shock to sorrow to anger.  This national outrage has now led us to war.  But it is not because we are enraged that we will seek vengeance at this time, but because we are moral beings with a duty to uphold justice and  righteousness.

     The Bible gives our President, George W. Bush, the duty and  responsibility to carry out an attack against the terrorists.  President Bush has the right to  authorize "war" against these terrorists.  Not any kind of war, but a  just war.  A just war is a war that seeks to both punish evil, and protect  from evil.

     Most of  the rules developed by  just war theory have since been incorporated into modern international laws governing armed conflict, such as The Hague and Geneva Conventions.   There are six things required for a just war:

1. Just Cause:  A nation may launch a war only for the right reasons.  The  just causes often mentioned include: self-defense from external attack; protection of innocents; and punishment for wrongdoing.

2. Right Intention:  A nation must intend to fight the war only for the sake of a just cause.  Having the right reason for launching a war is not  enough:  the actual motivation behind the war must also be morally  appropriate.

3. Proper authority and public declaration.

4. Last Resort:  A nation may resort to war only if it has exhausted all plausible, peaceful alternatives to resolving the conflict in question, such as diplomatic negotiation.

5. Probability of Success:  A nation may not resort to war if it can  foresee that doing so will have no measurable impact on the situation.  The  aim here is to block mass violence which is going to be futile.

6. Proportionality:  A nation must, prior to launching a war, weigh the universal good expected to result from it-- such as securing the  just cause-- against the universal evils expected to result.  Only if the benefits are proportional to, or "worth", the costs  may the war action proceed.

     Just war theory insists all six criteria must each be fulfilled for a  particular declaration of war to be justified: it's all or nothing.

     Biblically, there  is a difference between murdering and killing.  The former is always  unjustified while the latter may be justified.  There are several instances  in the Bible where it is morally acceptable, if not mandated, to kill.  Exodus 22:2 allows for killing in self-defense, and Genesis 9:6 commands  killing in the form of capital punishment (which is reconfirmed in the New Testament in Romans 13:4).  Going further, God approved certain wars in the Bible and even blessed those who obeyed Him in  His military decree (Abraham in Genesis 14; a war to defend the  innocent).  God also commanded Joshua (in Joshua 10) to wage war against the  wicked Canaanites and to exterminate them for their sins.   In the New Testament we have Paul who sanctions "just war" indirectly and  capital punishment directly in Romans 13.  Also, John the Baptist approved  of the role of the military when he was asked by soldiers what they should  do now that they have become Christians.  John's reply--interestingly enough-- was to  simply "be content" and be good soldiers (Luke 3:14).  He did not tell them  to leave their posts.  So there is good, biblical basis for current military actions taking place.

     The moral or philosophical grounds are also strong.  First, in a sinful and wicked world will always be  necessary, to some degree or another.  We don't live in a perfect world  (heaven); we live in a dying and evil place, and so we need prisons to contain evil people, and we need just people to bear the sword for righteousness' sake.  Second, it is evil not to resist evil.

     On that note, it is morally wrong not to defend the innocent.  And sometimes, only  physical force can accomplish this duty.  In this case, military action is the only way to defend innocent lives in the  future.   With regards specifically to the United States'  resolve against terrorism, allow me to conclude with a few points.

     A war in defense of the innocent is just.  Terrorists have attacked and waged war against us, and so a war against aggression is a just war.  Genesis 14  is a case in point, where the kings of the Valley attacked first, and  Abraham responded to their initial physical aggression and attack in defense  of the innocent.  The situation is very similar here with the U.S. and the World Trade Center attacks.   So our war against terrorism  would be just, because we are doing it, in part, in defense of the innocent.

     This war led by the U.S. is just because it seeks to execute  justice.  Our goal is  not only to retaliate for the protection of innocent  lives, but also to punish those who committed these evil acts.  A just war may be punitive in nature.  For example:  World War  II, where the Allied forces sought to take out Hitler's regime for his unjustified aggression and atrocities.  The principle here is the same as capital punishment: a life for a life.

     A just war may have a very strong punitive element to it.  Justice demands that the punishment fit the crime, whether the criminal is an individual or a nation.  If Osama bin  Laden and his Al Qaeda organization executed these recent terrorist acts, justice, as  President Bush recently promised, "will be served."  This justice may be  punitive in nature and not just defensive.

      A just war must be fought by a recognized authority or government.  Romans 13:4 stipulates that the sword is given to governments and not to  individuals.  Only declared wars are just wars, and only governments can  declare war.  President Bush is a recognized authority, and he holds the  highest position this nation.  Therefore, he has authority, if he desires, to declare war on the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, and any other terrorist regime.

     My fourth and final comment is this: A just war must be fought justly.  Governments that engage in just wars cannot torture or starve prisoners, and  chemical or biological warfare is unacceptable.  Moreover, intentionally  targeting innocent women and children is also unjustified.  It is one thing  if a woman or child has a grenade ready to throw for her army; it is a  wholly other thing to shoot at a mother nursing her baby.  Many innocent lives are at stake, and they are not the objects of our wrath.  We must be specific and target those responsible, not those who happen to dwell near them.  Just wars include just acts in those wars.